I’ll be the first to admit that the Reader has published some pretty asinine stories in the past, but the one you not only decided to print but also give the cover was enough to make my blood boil (“Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife,” May 8).
It is bad enough you chose to glorify this disgusting, fetid, foul skank of a leech, but to have her further this insult by degrading the uniform I proudly wore for over 20 years of my life makes me physically ill.
How dare you publish an article that glorifies much that is wrong about the narcissistic, me-first element of today’s society? How dare you insult the honor of all who have worn that uniform with the mindless drivel of this self-absorbed dreck of human debris?
What I would give to wipe the smile off the face of that two-legged, whoring garbage can.
Peter J. Fonte
Woman With Confidence
“Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife” (Cover Story, May 8) is a wonderfully vivid story told by a woman with confidence. I commend you as the editor and the Reader as a whole for having the strength and vision to publish such a controversial story.
Vincent J. Wainwright
Would you go into battle dependent on a lying trailer trash such as the tubby loser you featured in your very questionable cover story (“Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife,” May 8)?
I sure as heck would not want to have her watching my back.
Come on, you can come up with better stories than this.
Lost My Respect
I read your cover story “Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife” (May 8) with interest since I am planning on becoming a real Navy wife in the future. I moved to San Diego to do my medical residency and subsequently met my boyfriend/ future fiancé, who is completing his medical residency with the Navy. We are anticipating his deployment in a year and struggling ourselves with the pressure of whether to get married before his deployment or wait until we could be together permanently after he returns.
Obviously the financial benefits of being married are much better than staying single, as Ms. Young points out, not to mention the privileges provided from being a Navy wife, but we are lucky enough to not have to worry as much about financial difficulties, given our future careers in the medical profession.
I thought she did a good job of pointing out how single people are punished and military marriages in general undergo more stress due to the demands of the Navy. However, I firmly disagree with her sweeping statement that ended the article: “The military brings out the bad in them.” While the military may put people in uncomfortable positions with difficult personal life decisions, I believe that every person in the military owes it to themselves and the people they are serving to do the right thing, and they have not lost their free will to make ethically correct decisions. She lost my respect by implying that people can use the military as an excuse to “do bad things” just because things didn’t turn out the way they thought they would.
That was a poor article to place on the front of the Reader (“Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife,” May 8). It was tasteless and inaccurate.
The article was poorly researched, poorly written, praised fraudulent activity, and bashed the very institute that is responsible for her having the ability to talk in public.
She falsely attacked a constituency that is part of San Diego’s economy and who has many family members that live here.
For a paper that has been a solid part of San Diego’s eclectic corner, it is sad that the Reader decided to follow the path of other no-longer-relevant papers. There has been a growing rumor that the Reader is losing readership — apparently the rumor must be true for this paper to stoop to substandard tactics.
How sad the Reader stooped low rather than reaching up.
Navy Not So Bad
I read the Reader not often, but I do read it. I just finished the lead story of the May 8 issue, “Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife,” and while it gave some good information, I felt that it was just way over the top on the fact that everyone in the Navy hates the Navy and that the Navy screws over everyone they possibly can. I’ve been out of the Navy for approximately 30 years, and my experience was nothing like hers. I know a lot of married people that were in the military had absolutely no relationship like she says we had. I just think that this article was below the Reader and you’re a better paper than to publish stuff like this.
Maggie Young should request a refund of her journalism class tuition (“Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife,” Cover Story, May 8). I was amazed at the narrative from this apparent piece of white trash (a picture is worth a thousand words) regarding her part in the conspiracy against the federal government and the Navy to commit fraud for economic gain, right up until page 30. There the story jumps the track, and without any preliminaries, she does the right thing and confesses to NCIS agent Darnita Brown that she had committed a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ.) She later tries to offer the specious argument that if some sailors choose to break their marriage vows by having sex with people other than their spouses, why shouldn’t she be paid to have an exclusive platonic relationship with her coconspirator?
Perhaps she made the fortunate error of being indiscreet while shooting her mouth off to shipmates about successfully gaming the system, and they dropped a dime on her, which led to her successful prosecution. Unfortunately, the American taxpayers are still out the $31,025.10 she stole while receiving the unauthorized BAH payments (minus the $4000 fine).
I’m writing in response to May 8’s cover story, “Confessions of a Phony Navy Wife.” While I understand this young woman’s position, mine is quite simple: What she did was not only wrong; it ruins the sanctity of marriage, especially in the military.
A big difference between her and those fellow sailors she mentioned in her story was her conscious decision to marry for money. As a veteran and a Navy wife, I’ve seen both sides. But in a country where the divorce rate is almost half, we all have to make the conscious choice to stand by our decisions, whether it is joining the military or getting married, no matter how grim the results may be. This is the very right she was serving her country to defend.
Furthermore, I wonder if she ever took a moment to step outside the box and explore other options. Did she ever consider finding roommates and living off base? Did she use every resource the Navy had to offer to her advantage, such as free education and training? Did she bother to think how advantageous her military experience would be for her once she got out and applied for a civilian job? No. She decided free food and a roof over her head wasn’t enough and the Navy “owed” her. She did the unhonorable thing in a community where honor can sometimes be the only thing you have left at the end of the day. Let this be a lesson to those service members who try to defy the core values their branch tried to instill in them.
Cost of an apartment in San Diego: $1452
Marriage certificate: $100
Fine for fraudulently collecting BAH: $4000
Getting what you deserve: Priceless
Paradise Lost And Found
It was with interest I read your story about the University House at Black’s Beach (“How UCSD Spent Over $500,000 on a Home Remodel That Never Happened,” Cover Story, May 1). As a teen growing up in Santa Barbara, I thought I lived in a paradise, and Santa Barbara truly is a magical place to grow up; however, when my uncle, William D. McElroy, became chancellor of UCSD, I visited him at the University House and found a new “paradise.” I spent several summers living in the University House, mowing the lawns of the mansions around La Jolla Farms and surfing Black’s and the Shores. It would be a shame to let this architectural gem disappear. It is my hope that all attempts will be made to retrofit the house, and a slice of history will remain intact.
That Old House
Thank you very much for your excellent article on UCSD’s University House (“How UCSD Spent Over $500,000 on a Home Remodel That Never Happened,” Cover Story, May 1). I have been interested in this project for some time and came up with the idea of involving the This Old House TV and magazine people in it. I think they might be interested in remodeling it within the parameters that have been imposed. I feel that they might welcome surmounting the Indian-burial-grounds problem as well as the cliff-location problem. They traditionally work with local architects, planning commissions, etc. They could perhaps find common ground with the La Jolla Historical Society, UCSD, etc. The project would have national TV and magazine coverage and be great publicity for the university and the city. I have tried contacting the university and was politely brushed off. The La Jolla Historical Society was interested but not willing to help me contact This Old House. Perhaps you or your readers can help.
Alan M. Blank
I enjoyed the article about San Diego’s aquarists; however, there was one part of it that was a little disturbing (“No One’s Ever Told Me That I Look Like a Fish,” Cover Story, April 24). If a person raises a warm-blooded animal in a sparse environment for the sole purpose of producing offspring, they’re usually referred to as being the owner of a mill — puppy mill, kitten mill. Why then would someone think it was fine to keep fish in a deprived environment for that purpose? It’s clear that many of the aquarists believe that in their homes, their fish deserve as natural a habitat as possible. Why then would they obtain their fish from someone who keeps their breeding stock massed in bare aquariums? This didn’t make much sense to me, and as I said, I did find it a little disturbing. It sounds to me like that guy is operating a fish mill, for want of a better term, and I hope that he seriously considers the hypocrisy of that.
I appreciate your efforts in enlightening the readers on the different denominations/practices/sects (“Sheep and Goats”), but after all your efforts, do you truly believe religion is “unifying” and not just “all about me”? It is the nature of humankind to “fear” and be suspicious of “others” not in their immediate cultural and/or mind-set, so as long as there are different religious “clubs,” there will never be “peace,” because “clubs” require “power leaders” who “interpret God’s will” but engulf the masses in arbitrary perceptions of “others.”
I know why the bee colonies are collapsing (Local Events, January 17). It’s because of all the soda, energy drink containers, etc., that are littered all over the place and then picked up by scavengers who then drain the liquid into the soil. This is the false nectar that is screwing up the bees.